Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"JWBA68" wrote in message
...

CONTROVERSIAL plans to build a tube depot in Croxley Green have been
quashed by
Three Rivers District Council.
London Underground wants to build a new depot on Green Belt land at Long
Valley Wood to replace its existing one at Ruislip.

How would this benefit the Central Line, which is what Ruislip depot serves?
Are they proposing loads of empty stock movements from the Central Line via
the depot curve onto the Uxbridge branch (reverse), then to
Harrow-on-the-Hill (reverse) and up to Watford?

Sounds like someone has got their depots confused. Replacing Neasden would
make more sense, transferring Metropolitan maintenance to the new depot,
either together with the Jubilee stock or by leaving Neasden as a Jubilee
*only* depot.

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
. ..

London Underground wants to build a new
depot on Green Belt land at Long Valley
Wood to replace its existing one at Ruislip.

How would this benefit the Central Line, which is what Ruislip depot
serves?

I imagine that LU were planning to move Ruislip's non-Central-Line
activities to the Watford site, allowing more Central Line work to be done
at Ruislip, so that a replacement for the doomed White City depot would not
need to be found.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

John Rowland wrote:
"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
. ..

London Underground wants to build a new
depot on Green Belt land at Long Valley
Wood to replace its existing one at Ruislip.

How would this benefit the Central Line, which is what Ruislip
depot serves?

I imagine that LU were planning to move Ruislip's non-Central-Line
activities to the Watford site, allowing more Central Line work to
be done at Ruislip, so that a replacement for the doomed White City
depot would not need to be found.

This is in fact a proposal by Metronet (not LU) to build a depot for
track renewal work on disused railway land next to the Grand Union Canal
south of Croxley station next to Long Valley Wood. The land was
formerly the Tip Sidings where LU used to dump building rubble etc. The
connection is still in place off the southbound line from Croxley just
before it crosses the canal.

We had a thread in u.t.l about this in July this year called "New depot
plans not enough to satisfy residents".
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
In article
"Richard J." writes:

snip
This is in fact a proposal by Metronet (not LU) to build a depot for
track renewal work on disused railway land next to the Grand Union Canal
south of Croxley station next to Long Valley Wood. The land was
formerly the Tip Sidings where LU used to dump building rubble etc. The
connection is still in place off the southbound line from Croxley just
before it crosses the canal.

So if I've got this right, the local NIMBYs are objecting to a change of
use from railway to railway?

From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same line!

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

surely if its railway land and there is track on it there is no need for
this

railways act ????

Kev
"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
In article
"Richard J." writes:

snip
This is in fact a proposal by Metronet (not LU) to build a depot for
track renewal work on disused railway land next to the Grand Union
Canal
south of Croxley station next to Long Valley Wood. The land was
formerly the Tip Sidings where LU used to dump building rubble etc.
The
connection is still in place off the southbound line from Croxley just
before it crosses the canal.

So if I've got this right, the local NIMBYs are objecting to a change of
use from railway to railway?

From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a
letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same
line!

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...
From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a
letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same
line!

IMHO there's more to it than that. The site is currently disused; all it was
ever used for was dumping of waste, mainly from Neasden Power Station, all
of which came by rail.

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning? Is this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

Is this depot being built by Metronet? IIRC TransPlant is owned by
TubeLines. One wonders if it is being built simply to allow Metronet to have
their own facility and not to have to rely on TubeLines/Transplant.

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

On 2004-09-25, David Splett wrote:

[...]

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Yep. Personally I'm interested because I live close to Chalfont and
Latimer tube station and I'm wondering if I'll be woken up by 66s whizzing
by on their way to the new depot from Aylesbury.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning? Is this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

It's all here in detail:

http://www.google.com/search?q=DC+re...Valley+Wood%22

The original PDF of the planning application is no longer there but you
can click "View as HTML" and it's almost as good.


HTH,
Matt.
--
Matt Saunders http://www.yoyo.org/matts/contacts/
"This is getting very silly. Too silly."
- Professor Yaffle

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

In message , at 23:24:23 on
Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Robin Mayes
remarked:
From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same line!

As someone said last time this came up, depots like that should be sited
miles away from any habitation. I suggest this particular one is sited
at least 10 miles away from any part of the underground.

/sarcasm
--
Roland Perry

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

I hate to say this - its not up to YOU to dictate how much traffic uses a
railway line, You chose to live near the line, accept the consequences, same
with people who live near airports , and those who live near motorways.

If you live near a line you must be prepared for noise at all hours of the
day and night.

If they do rebuild this depot and I Hope they do It will take more lorries
off the road, something everyone wants apparently.

it was there for god knows how long with trains working all hours before it
closed.

NIMBYS Make me sick "!!!!

K



"Matt Saunders" wrote in message
...
On 2004-09-25, David Splett wrote:

[...]

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Yep. Personally I'm interested because I live close to Chalfont and
Latimer tube station and I'm wondering if I'll be woken up by 66s whizzing
by on their way to the new depot from Aylesbury.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning? Is
this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

It's all here in detail:

http://www.google.com/search?q=DC+re...Valley+Wood%22

The original PDF of the planning application is no longer there but you
can click "View as HTML" and it's almost as good.


HTH,
Matt.
--
Matt Saunders http://www.yoyo.org/matts/contacts/
"This is getting very silly. Too silly."
- Professor Yaffle

Councillors crush tube depot plans
 

"David Splett" wrote in message ...
"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...
From disused railway land to railway land to be used to help make
improvements on the Metropolitan Line. Next week they're be writing a
letter
to the papers saying that something should be done to improve the same
line!

IMHO there's more to it than that. The site is currently disused; all it was
ever used for was dumping of waste, mainly from Neasden Power Station, all
of which came by rail.

The new proposal, if I understand things correctly, is for the site to be
used for an engineers' depot to take on some of the functions currently
performed by Ruislip. There is a big difference between a rail-served ash
tip and a working depot with regular deliveries of materials by road.

Does anyone know exactly what LU and/or the Infracos are planning? Is this
just a small development to serve North-West London, or a large depot to
serve the needs of the whole system?

Is this depot being built by Metronet? IIRC TransPlant is owned by
TubeLines. One wonders if it is being built simply to allow Metronet to have
their own facility and not to have to rely on TubeLines/Transplant.

Although we do have to consider the implications of the dumping of old fuel

This electricity can be very harmfull as it leaks out of the shoes into the ground